STOKERS' WAGES

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23828, 7 June 1939, Page 15

STOKERS' WAGES

GASWORKS EMPLOYEES RULING AGAINST NELSON COUNCIL (Per United Press Association) NELSON, June 6. In a case brought by the Inspector of Factories against the Nelson City Council, alleging breaches of the New Zealand Gasworks Employees' Award in regard to the payment of stokers' wages to five men carrying out the duties of leading hands, Mr T. E. Maunsell, S.M., to-day gave reserved judgment for the plaintiff. The magistrate said it was not a case of any attempt at evasion of the council's obligations and therefore he would impose a penalty of onlj £1 ss. The magistrate said: "' The proceedings were taken for the purpose of obtaining a ruling from the court upon a. bona fide dispute that has arisen as to whether the five men are entitled to extra hourly wages as being leading hands. The council contends that they have not been appointed leading hands and art not so in fact. There are only two men on each shift. In my opinion the men are leading hands for the following reasons:— "1. The award presupposes that in horizontal retorts with power stoking machines there will be a leading hand and provides for a greater increase of Wages than those provided for in the case of stokers in charge of the two other classes of horizontal retorts. "2. These men have to look after a steam boiler for which they have to have a certificate from the Marine Department. They are responsible for tne quality and quantity of the gas, and are In charge of the exhauster. They also look after other machines. The second man on the shift spends most of his time in the retort house and does not touch any machinery, except the charging and discharging machine. He does not require to have, a certificate. Mr Stokes cou> siders that these men require a higher standard of skill than their mates and Mr Downes says that they would be looked to if anything went wrong with the gas as regards quality or quantity. "3. The council appears to accept the proposition that dual control on shifts is undesirable and the agreement in force before the award was made contains this clause: 'One stoker in each shift to be appointed by the engineer shall be recognised as the leading stoker of his shift and as such shall receive instructions on behalf of the shift, and, subject to the direction of the engineer or foreman, shall exercise control over the direct work of the shift.' " There is conflict in the evidence whether these men or any of them were appointed leading stokers under this clause, but at least it was recognised by the council that there should be a leading stoker in each shift. I uphold the , department's contention but the case clearly calls for a nominal penalty."